Where did the anti-family vibe come from? - Page 3

andremiguel · #31 Jun 3, '12, 11:23 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Link0126

well, last time I checked this was an internet forum but if you are only interested in people validating your life I will gladly move on.

The OP just stated the option of couples of having no kids(one). He did not throw himself into couples with infertility problems (two).
Now, what is your opinion about these 2 situations?

**Dale_M** · #32 Jun 4, '12, 1:07 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mschrank

From the dawn of man some 150,000 years ago (yes, I believe in evolution) to about 40 years ago, children were considered to be nothing but a gain.

I don't think that is true. Fornication isn't new, and children would have been regarded as as an undesired result just as much earlier in history as now. And even within a marriage, childbirth was a major killer of women/ For example, colonial America:

Quote:

Childbirth in colonial America was a difficult and sometimes dangerous experience for women. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, between 1 percent and 1.5 percent of all births ended in the mother's death as a result of exhaustion, dehydration, infection, hemorrhage, or convulsions. Since the typical mother gave birth to between five and eight children, her lifetime chances of dying in childbirth ran as high as 1 in 8. This meant that if a woman had eight female friends, it was likely that one might die in childbirth.

Death in childbirth was sufficiently common that many colonial women regarded pregnancy with dread. In their letters, women often referred to childbirth as "the Dreaded apperation," "the greatest of earthly miserys," or "that evel hour I loock forward to with dread."

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/his...childbirth.cfm

Then there is a possibility of having more children than one can support, sometimes crudely put as "another mouth to feed." Infanticide by mother or father is not a new practice.

The desire to limit the number of children one has is not a new thing.

Calliso · #33 Jun 4, '12, 6:56 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueEyedLady

I guess my question is why Calliso's free time, resources, and energy are all owed to children who don't exist? It would be a selfish attitude if children were being neglected, but I'm not convinced not having kids in the first place is wrong, or anyone else's business for that matter. And there is a difference between being child-free and anti-family.

Yeah thats what I really donlt get. I mean I am not neglecting anyone. I donlt have children so how is it being selfish to choose to spend my time how I want to? And yeah childfree doesnt have to mean antifamily. I mean I donlt go around saying people shouldn;t have family and I do love my own family *meaning my parents relatives and sister* I just have reasons *far more then I listed in this thread* for not wanting to start a family of my own. I do see how that is selfish I am not wronging anyone or neglecting anything.

Calliso · #34 Jun 4, '12, 7:09 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Contra Mundum

Because she explicitly says so. Of course, it is nobody's business, but we are discussing this phenomenon on this thread, so her statment invites a comment.

As for not having kids and morality, as an atheist-secularist you have a very different idea of what is good and right from what Catholics believe. My guess is that your idea about human nature is different from ours (if you believe in human nature at all - it is all just a social construct, no?) and that the idea of lifestyle choice is your god. One thing is as good as any other since there is no universal and objective criteria to follow.

Umm where do I say that?

BlueEyedLady · #35 Jun 4, '12, 7:17 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Contra Mundum

Because she explicitly says so. Of course, it is nobody's business, but we are discussing this phenomenon on this thread, so her statment invites a comment.

As for not having kids and morality, as an atheist-secularist you have a very different idea of what is good and right from what Catholics believe. My guess is that your idea about human nature is different from ours (if you believe in human nature at all - it is all just a social construct, no?) and that the idea of lifestyle choice is your god. One thing is as good as any other since there is no universal and objective criteria to follow.

So after calling Calliso selfish and explaining why I see the world differently than you do you mind just answering why she owes all of these things to people who don't exist and why she is obligated to have children?

akela135 · #36 Jun 4, '12, 7:26 am

I am just recently married and while I don't want children I don't view myself as anti-family. I've always had a great relationship with my parents and with my younger brother and even now I work hard to help them out when I can. The same with DH, he loves his parents and his sister and her family, he has babysat for his niece before and thinks she is a very cute kid but doesn't want any children of his own either.

The biggest part is I'm not ready to be a parent, and by that I mean not mature enough. I could give you the reasons I don't want children, some of them well thought out, but I guess the bottom line everyone would conclude is that I'm selfish. I put DH before me, every day. I put my friends before me, and I put my family before me, which is why I'd argue I wasn't selfish, however I have to realize that putting others before me isn't a defense because I'd put others before a baby. I'd put DH before the baby, I'd put my friends before the baby, and I'd put my family before the baby. That is what makes me selfish.

I always wonder about people who are able to put their children before their spouse, how did you reach that point and what am I doing wrong to prevent from also getting to that point? I know as I am now I could never do that, I love DH to much to consider putting anything or anyone before him. If both DH and a baby needed me at the same time I'd go to DH first. If a friend called and said it was really important that I was there for them and my child said the same thing I'd be there for my friend first, after all we'd share a history and it would be selfish to abandoned them now because my choice of a having a child was getting in the way of being the best friend I could be. I guess this is my biggest concern, would the choice to have a child sabotouge all my relationships and prevent me from being there for all the people that need me? How could I let my choice to have a child harm so many other people? Isn't that the most selfish I could be, to know I'm in the position to help and be there for many people and just toss it out the window to attend to a child that only exisit because I brought it into the world? So as I said, I'm still too immature to have a child so I feel I should wait until I'd be willing to make those sacrifices to have one.

KostyaJMJ · #37 Jun 4, '12, 7:32 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueEyedLady

So after calling Calliso selfish and explaining why I see the world differently than you do you mind just answering why she owes all of these things to people who don't exist and why she is obligated to have children?

You've been around here long enough to have had this discussion before, haven't you? Catholics believe the main purpose of marriage is the creation and upbringing of children. If you aren't called to have children, then you aren't called to marriage. So attempting to get the benefits of a marriage while avoiding the responsibility is seen as selfish.

Calliso · #38 Jun 4, '12, 8:01 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by KostyaJMJ

You've been around here long enough to have had this discussion before, haven't you? Catholics believe the main purpose of marriage is the creation and upbringing of children. If you aren't called to have children, then you aren't called to marriage. So attempting to get the benefits of a marriage while avoiding the responsibility is seen as selfish.

Yeah true, of course I admit I didn;t go into marriage with the intention of not having children. That decision only came after much thought and consideration. Not only of myself but of my spouse and any "potential" children. So if people want to call that selfish so be it.

BlueEyedLady · #39 Jun 4, '12, 8:06 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Contra Mundum

Because she explicitly says so. Of course, it is nobody's business, but we are discussing this phenomenon on this thread, so her statment invites a comment.

As for not having kids and morality, as an atheist-secularist you have a very different idea of what is good and right from what Catholics believe. My guess is that your idea about human nature is different from ours (if you believe in human nature at all - it is all just a social construct, no?) and that the idea of lifestyle choice is your god. One thing is as good as any other since there is no universal and objective criteria to follow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calliso

Yeah true, of course I admit I didn;t go into marriage with the intention of not having children. That decision only came after much thought and consideration. Not only of myself but of my spouse and any "potential" children. So if people want to call that selfish so be it.

It's far less selfish than bringing children in to the world that for whatever reason you can't parent and raise properly just because you feel you're supposed to.

Calliso · #40 Jun 4, '12, 8:21 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueEyedLady

It's far less selfish than bringing children in to the world that for whatever reason you can't parent and raise properly just because you feel you're supposed to.

Yep exactly I mean would people rather people like me that wouldn;t be good parents have a kid anyway out of obligation? I mean I am already married so thats not going to change.

TheRealJuliane · #41 Jun 4, '12, 12:02 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by andremiguel

1st- Romanticism in the beginning of the XIX century. You must marry for love (meaning passion).
2nd- The 60ties.

But we could go back to Henry the VIII.

Poor old Henry. He catches the blame for the split that bastardized the Anglican Church, and now this???

ahollars · #42 Jun 4, '12, 12:50 pm

I love it when people try to justify themselves with contradictions.

Cat · #43 Jun 4, '12, 12:58 pm

It's probably tempting to blame the media, especially Hollywood.

But if you look at a lot of the movie stars, many of them have several children and are adopting children, and will say enthusiastically in interviews that their children are the best thing that ever happened to them.

My favorite actor, Robert Patrick, says that his two children are his best production!

But of course, the movie stars are rich and can afford a large family.

I think that a lot of the anti-family vibe has developed as a result of various government policies that are "anti-family" or at best, "unfriendly to families."

E.g., the more taxes that are required of a family, the less money they have to raise their children. Now yes, we all know that children don't NEED piano lessons, soccer team, ballet classes, a pet dog, a vacation, swimming at the local pool during the summer, art supplies, roller skates, the Super Duper Deluxo Lego Set, ice skating lessons--actually, children DO need ice skating lessons!

But some of these things are sure nice to offer to our children! It's no fun to give the kids a tin can and tell them to kick it around the yard while so many other children are joining local soccer teams, practicing an instrument, inviting grandparents to the dance recital, etc.

And it's no fun never being able to afford to even go to a McDonald's once in a while.

Also, a lot of the government's policies have hurt the development of business and industry in the U.S., sending jobs overseas, and that makes it really really hard to support a family if the parents only have a high school diploma. My dad dropped out after 8th grade, and many of his friends were the same way, but they all managed to find excellent factory jobs and provide us with a very pleasant childhood free of want and including a few extras (piano lessons for me). But nowadays, all the stats say that without those without a college diploma or at least a trade school certificate are most likely to be jobless, and that makes it hard to have a family.

A lot of families compensate for lack of income by having both parents work. This is another thing that makes it hard for families. Although some women are Super Women and able to successfully and happily juggle their jobs and their families, most are not, and most women find themselves exhausted and resentful trying to do so much. This was not what they pictured. I think that for Catholic women who are trying to be faithful to the teachings of the Church, there's an extra level of resentment against God as well, for making sex a minefield--if they don't have sex, they alienate their husbands and hurt their marriage, but if they do have sex, they might get pregnant again, and they can't afford another baby, who will increase the financial pressures and drain even more energy and time away from them.

Meanwhile the husband feels exhausted and resentful trying to be a dad and a mom, and a girlfriend to a wife who is at the end of her rope. And he also feels guilty that he doesn't make enough money to enable his wife to stay home and take care of family, or at least work part time, or even hire a cleaning service.

And the kids are caught in the middle of all of this, and feel the time and energy crunch that constantly squishes their family. They may or may not comprehend that Mom and Dad are exhausted just trying to pay the bills, but children can't just turn off their needs.

Our current overtaxation is just one example of a government policy that is anti-family. Another example is all the educational garbage that forces schools to teach as fact certain ideas that are actually anti-Christian (e.g., celebration of homosexuality), while at the same time denying any mention of religion. This means that parents are forced to either home-school their children or send them to private schools, which puts even MORE financial pressure on Dad and Mom, and often forces both of them to go to work at a job outside the home.

Even our driving laws make it difficult for families. E.g., the car seat requirement seems like a good idea, but it is very expensive--larger families must buy a large vehicle and many car seats to be compliant with the law. A small family can't take a driving trip anymore and allow the children to lay down in the back seat and sleep while they keep driving through the night (to save money).

I'm not sure if we can go back at this point. I fear that so much of these policies have become the norm that those who are against come across as "extremists" or "nut jobs."

Maryann C · #44 Jun 4, '12, 3:20 pm

I'm with Aholars

but I am going to get back to you Dale when I get the energy...no sleep last night ...those darn teenagers ..got to love them

...and I wasn't going to have kids until I could afford a nanny and boarding school....Oh what I would have missed ..all that spiritual growth experience and my whole conversion story. They are TRULY a gift and I THANK GOD he didn't listen to MY plans.

Debora123 · #45 Jun 4, '12, 4:18 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mschrank

I got married 5 years ago to my wonderful wife and now we have 2 beautiful children. We have a nice house with a big backyard in a neighborhood full of other kids and we have a great sense of community here. I'm not rich (enlisted military) but I make a decent amount and it's stable so I can keep my family well taken care of. I love life. Seriously, this is the happiest I have ever been.

I wrote that not to brag, but to lay out the next part of my post. Why on earth would anyone be against this kind of life, or not want it, or make disparaging remarks and prefer to be single or at least married-with-no-kids? I just don't get it, it totally boggles my mind. There is such a strong anti-family sentiment especially amongst younger people and intellectual types.

I have really no idea what you are talking about. The vast majority of people I know are or would love to be married with kids and have a stable career and nice house. If anything, it is the American Dream itself.

I have never heard any negative comments or hatefulness towards this type of life.